On Monday, June 30, 2003, at 09:16 PM, Ken Norris wrote:
I took the basic premise I started from, then sliced off bits and pieces of
the posted scripts, reassembled them, refactored and hopefully reduced it.
I'm glad you are able to get into this.
I would like to point out to all that Jan's example, Ken's masterpiece, and both of Scott's examples have a feature that if left in when one tries to generalize the approach can be a problem. That feature has been in some that I have presented, too.
In the up-and-coming real-soon-now totally-free "A Primer on Message Mechanics" (formerly send primer) is a checklist for the desired starting behavior and a potential multiple cycles. The key question for here is in essence:
Can multiple calls to the start handler create multiple cycles?
How about if they are executed quickly in succession?Well, examples used intervals of 10, 20 and 50 ms, so repeated mouseDown while a message is pending is unlikely, but if one increases that drastically, or tries to apply this a different way, there can be trouble. Imagine an interval of 800 ms and down-up-down-up-dooooooooooooooooooowwwwwwwwwwwn.
The primer starts out with a simple example that does not use the message ID as all of these examples. The primer introduces some concepts slowly, so the ID is introduced later. It solves this problem by using a third state in the state variable, on that I intend to be natural in the example.
Partially by isolating start and stop handlers and paying attention to the state variables, the primer introduces an approach to building message machines that are stable and robust, suitable for building into complex machinery including that with custom and built-in callbacks. Well, that's my goal anyway. The first half, of course, is primarily about send.
I'm hammering some at this every day.
Dar Scott
_______________________________________________ use-revolution mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
